"6mm Kursk game" Topic

The latest remote texting game was a bit of a disappointment. I was in the mood for a tank bash and I try to do a Kursk game every July-pushed back a month due to C19 and I just got around to editing the pics. It was based on the lopsided engagement in the area between Step' and Hill 227.9 on the morning of July 6, 1943 involving the 107th Tank Brigade and the StugIIIs of Stug. Abt 245 and off table Tigers of s.Pz. Abt 505.
I was afraid that it might be a bit of a blowout with the Russkies just providing moving targets. But we had some extreme dice rolling that made things just the opposite.
6mm minis and I Ain't Been Shot Mum rules.
Flickr link to the AAR:
link

‌The lead tankers of the 107th by Mark Luther, on Flickr

‌Hits on the center company by Mark Luther, on Flickr

‌Tiger scores by Mark Luther, on Flickr
‌Its a Stug Life by Mark Luther, on Flickr

‌The wave overwhelms by Mark Luther, on Flickr

Mark

I already do WWII in 15 and 28mm, why are you trying to get me into 6mm?

@Lawrence

Becoz U need 2 B educayted.

I use 6mm because I think it makes the best use of the table, gives a more accurate scale (like 1"=25m) and it gives a better visual representation of a battle. But then I'm lazy and not a real model builder and painter.

Wolfhag

Great looking table Mark.

I have to say that this was the easiest and quickest table that I have ever throw together.
Mark

Did you find IABSM was satisfactory for a mainly-vehicle game?

IABSM works fine for vehicle heavy games as long as the players are quick with the hit/damage results. Reminding people they have to roll so many strike dice and then so many armor dice each time can be very time consuming. Especially involving text exchanges.
Mark

Very nice !!! And 6mm Rules !!!!

Mark:

Another visually stunning game, that seems to have followed a realistic (if unexpected) arc through a well constructed scenario.

I already do WWII in 15 and 28mm, why are you trying to get me into 6mm?

Well we all make mistakes, don't we? So we are trying to help you recover from choosing the two scales that you have, neither of which can reasonably be used for what so many of us want from our games -- namely a realistic fit of vehicles (and combined arms) to terrain and maneuver.

That's all opinion, of course. Offered with a bit of tongue-in-cheek. I have no actual objection to anyone collecting whatever toys they like. But I think it is reasonable to suggest that gaming with 6mm miniatures gives you a better feel of a battlefield, particularly for multi-company actions. And that's where combined arms usually appeared in WW2.

IABSM works fine for vehicle heavy games…

Seems to have served well for this case.

I would observer, from the write-up, that each player was pushing about 10 vehicles (maybe plus-or-minus one or two). Is that right?

For most armies in WW2 that comes out to about 2 full strength platoons of vehicles. For Soviets it gives you a company.

If we want a company at full strength, or even a re-enforced company (with a platoon or more of supporting arms added), we would need rules that play reasonably well with 20 or more pieces per player.

So I read it as IABSM for under-strength companies per player, and something else might be a better choice for overstrength companies per player.

Horses, courses, etc….

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

I already do WWII in 15 and 28mm, why are you trying to get me into 6mm?

Go look at Mark Luther's FlickR albums, and he'll get you into other whole genres. He makes nice looking games that are very inspiring. It's entirely his fault that I spent copious time and treasure building winter terrain for my AWI collection.

- Ix

This is another great looking and well playing game, Mark Luther! This one was posted during the time before I was an active poster and just a mere lurker.